Okay, I'll restart this thread.

First I have a question....in my manual, it says to place a 2" piece of vacuum hose on the nipple coming off the bleed screw on the FPR, then attach the check valve at the end. Well, the FPR I got with my kit did not have a nipple coming off the bleed screw, it's just the screw coming straight out of the FPR. So I'm wondering, do I have the wrong FPR, or did I get instructions that are given with different model kits for different cars.

So here's how mine is set up now. I put the check valve inline to the vacuum line that goes from the intake manifold to the FPR, so that the FPR will boost pressure, but won't see vacuum. That way it won't adjust fuel pressure until it sees boost, correct?? Or am I wrong here?

It seems to be holding steady pressure, although my boosted fuel pressure is too high at the moment, I think. I'm at 40psi idle fuel pressure, and 100psi boosted fuel pressure. I'm stage 3, with 40lb injectors and a SAFC. I wanna boost 12-15psi, so what should my fuel pressures be??

Oh, and I also wanted to know....what is the LPH rating on the Accel inline fuel pump that comes with the HRC kit??

Thanks!!!

You are not your job.
You're not how much money you have in the bank.
You're not the car you drive.
You're not the contents of your wallet.
You're not your fu**ing post count.

97 Eclipse GS - *SOLD*
01 Audi A6 2.7T
01 YZF-R6

hey bro Ive got my old one at home. I will check it out but i think you are wrong on the check valve i believe it goes in the little piece of hose you refered to above. infact i think that there is a check valve inline(inside the hose ) and a nipple on the end of it. I'll check when i get home and tell you late mike

stage BIG custom mj racing turbo set up, built block.worked head,all tial components, hks evcez,spearco 992,oh yeah and a huge bottle in the trunk last run all turbo 13.8@108 no nos dyno'd at AEBS in Cali with 300+ hp to the wheels

Comments from the previous thread:

RyanRS:
"I try to set my idle fuel pressure at 55psi...but every time I go back to check it like the next day it will either be higher like at 80psi or lower around 35psi...it wont stay at 55...does it just suck? Any help?"

JasonESiT:
"Note: I told Ryan this would happen before I even installed the FPR.
Why? Why ask why?

-Bad exhuast manifold allen bolts
-Bad Fuel Mapper
-Oil drain line too short

AND

-BAD FUEL PRESSURE REGULATOR!"

JasonESiT Continued..

">So what do you suggest that you use in place of the "Bad
>allen bolts", "bad fuel mapper", and "bad fuel presure
>regulator". I am a Turbo 420A rookie....I need help.

Easy...

Instead of Allen bolts, get something else, such as 4g63 studs and nuts, just get anything else.

Instead of the Fuel Mapper, get the Missing Link that's been talked about a ton in some recent threads as of late. (Use Search function)

Instead of the HRC FPR, get the Vortech S-FMU.


Ryan- What's anyone going to say or do about your FPR Ryan?!?! Tell you to put a magical spell on it or tap it three times and hope that it'll be more steady in the future? There's a reason why everyone switches from the HRC FPR. This is common knowledge.

I merely posted my remark here so others who know that I only live 10 minutes away understand that I tried to provide you with a good answer.

After that, you're always free to give Bill Hahn a call and let him feed you his company line on how the FPR is supposedly properly doing this to compensate for temperature and barometric changes. When I read this explanation in the most recent fuel system you recieved, I thought what a ridiculous attempt to "scientifically" make excuses for a poor product.

Why is it that very other FPR I've bought since (such as the Vortech or the Aeromotive) have no such fluctuations under any circumstances?

Why would a turbo fuel system totally based on rising fuel pressures allow psi fluctuations of 10-20 psi or more when that's the most important component of fueling?

I'm still baffled."

XtremeRS:
"Yes, the cartech is a piece of shit....really... Get yourself a Vortech SFMU, it holds rock steady pressures, and is waayy better quality than the craptech fpr. Around 280-300 brand new from vortechsuperchargers.com. I have REPLACED almost EVERYTHING in my Hanh turbo kit, except the turbo itself, and the exaust manifold. The fuel pump whines like a rapped pig, the fuel mapper goes bad on damn near all of em, get the Missing Link map check valve to fix that. I was having probs with my craptech, so i took it apart and cleaned it, and lubed up the piston on the one diaprham, and it worked better than it did, but still not perfect. If you want to be done with it, get the vortech SFMU. Trust me."

Take it away, Bill..

______________________________
If a sentence found online has 35% misspellings or greater and includes at least two racially charged expletives, chances are it is a YouTube comment.

'95 Eclipse TurboGS (garage deco)
'95 TSi AWD (restoring a survivor)
'97 Talon ESi-T (poor impulse control)
'99 Eclipse RS-T (daily beater)
'13 Evo X (mostly stock)
'17 Sienna (Middle Aged Dad Mobile)



Factory Service Manuals: http://nawdu.de/files/

Ok, i think you just found your problem there. You MUST have that check valve on the BLEED valve, not the vac line going to the FPR. What is happening as the way you have it, the FPR isnt seeing any vacum, and it starts your fuel pressure rise rate too far up in pressure. Thats why you are running rich. You are also creating a vacum leak at the FRP with no check valve on the bleed screw, because air is being sucked into the valve at idle. Now its not THAT much air to be really concerned with, you may not even notice it on your boost gauge as a leak..Call up HRC and get that little nipple piece that screws into the bleed valve...I had to order one from them, because mine had broke off. Its only a few bucks.. After that is in, you will have to readjust your fuel pressure, and bleed screw. BUT this will most likely not fix your up and down fuel pressure problems..HRC can warrenty it for a new one, but you have to send in yours now, and then they check it out..If its bad, you get the newer design FPR. Just by looking at internal parts of both the Cartech, and the Vortech SFMU, its perfectly clear which one is of superior quality. Many others will agree. I have rock solid pressures now, didnt with the Cartech. Without doing a single thing else to my car, just with swapping these out, it fixed my fuel pressure problem, one just like you are having.

13.5 @108 MPH-2.2 60ft(stupid FWD!)
S16G @ 18 PSI/FMIC/Running on MegaSquirt II (Now with sequential
fuel injection)
My webpage: http://eclipsed4evr.home.comcast.net
-1998 Mitsubishi Eclipse RS-T- "Toy"
-1992 Plymouth Laser Turbo AWD(SOLD)
-2000 Honda CR-V(daily)

I want to clarify something for this discussion as long as Bill Hahn will participate in it. If Bill, all of the pieces in your kit worked as though they were supposed to work, and as possibly the the ones you have seen or used on your own RS, then the kit theoretically is not only a sound kit, but what I would describe as easily the pre-emininent kit in the market.

As I've told you before, I believe the success I have had with my system for over 30k miles is a testament to that system, and the ideas behind the system.

------------------------------------------------

Anyways, back to the discussion at hand, the Cartech(Bell) Fuel Pressure Regulator. As Ryan has started this thread through his own personal experiences with one of the issues with the FPR, there is a problem with the FPR in two areas as I have seen through my own experiences with the FPR, through personally helping Ryan with his FPR(down here in Springfield, Illinois) and lastly, through my tenure here at 2GNT.com helping others with their FPR's.

1) The FPR has a large tendency to fluctuate at idle. And when I mean fluctuation, I'm not merely commenting on one particular type of fluctuation, but instead, EVERY type of fluctuation. It fluctuates sometimes up, sometimes down, sometimes as much as 30 psi, and sometimes only 5 psi.

Moreover, even when it does seem to operate correctly, the fuel pressure seldom ever seems "rock steady." At first, I thought that the slight and rapid fluctuation of the fuel pressure gauge needle was normal, even though when I first installed the FPR, it had that quality of being more steady. However, over time with my FPR, and right off the bat with Ryan's Cartech Billet FPR, right after you properly set the FPR, the FPG needle would wiggle some, approximatly 2-4 psi on the guage, rapidly moving back and forth. But now I know that wiggling is in fact due to what I term a lack of quality in the FPR's ability to hold a steady and calm fuel pressure, from my more recent experiences with a Vortech S-FMU and now my Aeromotive 1:1 FPR.

It's important to highlight, note, and compare how both of these more recent FPR's experiences differ quite a bit from the Cartech model. As mentioned above, they hold fuel pressure ROCK SOLID. The fuel pressure never moves, doesn't vary, and if the outside, inside, or whatever temperature changes, I know the fuel pressure won't be effectuated. And don't just take my word for this, take much of the 2GNT community who uses your kit, and resultingly, your FPR.

As a result of the aforementioned FPR attribute, and as you well know, if the idle fuel pressure goes up +/- 10 psi or so, that WILL effect the boosted fuel pressure, if not trigger a check engine light from your car being too lean or rich. I know with 98 Talon, if the FP exceeds a +/- 5-7 psi level, it will trigger such a light. Furthermore, this leads down a dangerous path, or domino effect, to one's internals and mechanicals suffering perhaps a misfire, and even detonation due to leanness. (I know for someone like Ryan, he could not easily afford a rebuild should such a failure occur.)

2) The second problem I have observed to a lesser degree, but still very much related, is once you have initially set the boosted FP to a particular level, you can not change it, or at least change it very much. That means, if you have set the ratio to, let's say 6.66:1, and you later on get bigger injectors or are upping the boost, and you want the FP to be raised or lowered, you will not have much luck.

-------------------------------------------------

I can't really speculate as to why all of these problems occur with this FPR's inability to perform its only one real function, but there is definitely a problem. (I think it may possibly have to do with its rubber diaphram as opposed to a better quality diaphram used in other FPR's)

Moreover, I think its important to all of us here , to at least some degree, that HRC acknowledge some of the issues with this FPR. If it's supposed to be of lesser quality to keep costs down, it's fine. If for some reason you feel its traits of not being able to hold a steady FP is an allowable shortcoming, then I would respond back that the central piece in the HRC fuel system(which is so good in other ways) should be better, and for the money invested, deserves to be better.

That's really all I have. I would like to thank you again in participating in such a discussion that basically scrutinizes a large part of your turbosystem. Please try and understand, even through some of the shortcomings that we perceive in the kit, that I think most of the board still would and does advocate your kit over the "others," due to the core pieces of the system, namely the customer service, the expeditions manner in which the system is sent, the turbo itself, the manifold, and the design of the system, which smartly implements a quality aluminum fuel return line (in 96+ cars) versus other more "band-aid" approaches. Thanks again.

p.s. I think additional discussion should be owed in regards to the exhaust mannifold bolts and the HRC fuel mapper (I know we went round and round about this before, but people are still having problems- leanness and misfire problems!).

_____________________________________
Jason ESi-T

04' BMW 325Ci
91' Nissan 240SX
98' Eagle Talon ESi (sold)

okay sorry it took me so long. I had to dig through my receipt binder. I was wrong about both little pieces going in the same tube. My kit came with a signal restrictor (little piece of plastic that reduces the inner diameter of the input vac hose). And the other little piece is the check valve that goes about 2 inches away from your needle valve via hose. If you dont have those that is your problem. I got rid of the regulator because i blew the guts out of it. If you see a yellowish kinda stain between the parts of the regulator you will either need to get a rebuild kit or start looking for a new fpr. late mike

stage BIG custom mj racing turbo set up, built block.worked head,all tial components, hks evcez,spearco 992,oh yeah and a huge bottle in the trunk last run all turbo 13.8@108 no nos dyno'd at AEBS in Cali with 300+ hp to the wheels

What I'd like to do first is address the aspect of varying fuel pressure at idle. What follows is a guide that we have begun to add to turbosystems. We have also provided this info to those in the field who had questions.
======================================

Understanding and Working With the
Billet Fuel Injection Control Unit




Your Hahn RaceCraft Fuel Injection Control Unit (FICU) is a precision fuel regulation device designed to provide correct engine fueling to accommodate your turbosystem over a variety of conditions. Your engine?s fuel needs vary over a wide range, more so once you add turbocharging. The FICU, when set up correctly, will react to your engine?s changes in load and manifold pressure. The FICU's reactions to engine changes maintain an optimal air-fuel ratio at all times.

The FICU uses manifold pressure as a reference in determining the correct fuel delivery. When describing manifold pressure, both intake vacuum and boost pressure are included. Intake vacuum is typically expressed in inches of mercury (or in/hg.), while boost pressure is expressed in PSI. The critical aspect in understanding and working well with the FICU is to realize that it uses these changes in manifold vacuum/pressure to determine the correct fuel flow. Just as differences in boost pressure will affect the fuel delivery, so will changes in intake vacuum, such as at idle.

Idle manifold vacuum is not always the same value. It is not unusual to see a range of 5in/hg in vacuum change on a normal engine. What will cause such a large range? Primarily, engine temperature and load. Vacuum on a cold engine is different (typically higher) than on a warm engine. Load changes also affect vacuum, especially on four cylinder engines. Such loads include air conditioning, power steering, cooling fans, heavy alternator loads due to discharged batteries or huge stereos, etc.

Of course, as the engine vacuum changes, so does the FICU?s reaction. When idle vacuum is stronger, fuel pressure will be less, and when vacuum decreases, fuel pressure will rise. What can seem surprising is the amount of change: during normal variation in engine vacuum for any of the reasons noted above, fuel pressure will also vary, sometimes as much as ten to 15 PSI. Why so much change for what seems like a small change in vacuum? Bear in mind, the FICU is a variable device that allows for large fuel pressure changes, not only under boost, but during vacuum too: a change in vacuum of only 5 inches will result in a fuel pressure change of 15 PSI!

Your FICU?s behavior during vacuum changes is very intentional, and quite effective. It allows your turbocharged engine to achieve an optimal air-fuel ratio at all times, not just during boost. These air-fuel changes during part throttle vacuum conditions are critical to smooth drivability behavior.

How, then, should one interpret and adjust fuel pressure? Ideally, only adjust idle fuel pressure with the engine fully warmed up, and all accessories as well as cooling fan off. Adjust to the range specified in your Turbosystem Installation manual. For future reference, also record the vacuum reading (you will see it on your vacuum/boost gauge). Should you suspect a need to readjust in the future, simply repeat the conditions, while ensuring that the engine is operating at the same vacuum reading as when you last checked. If the pressure is within three PSI of the last time you set it, all is well.

Of course, if you monitor fuel pressure all the time with an in-car gauge, you will see the entire range of different idle fuel pressures your FICU achieves. If you are doing this, also view the vacuum gauge. You will soon learn the correlation between these two variables of boost and vacuum: even though they vary, they have a direct relationship with one another: when vacuum is higher, fuel pressure will be lower, and always in the same amount.

One last thing: does the variation in idle fuel pressure affect maximum fuel pressure achieved under boost? No, as vacuum induced changes in fuel pressure do not affect the FICU?s behavior under boost. The only time you need to re-check your boosted fuel pressure is if you adjust the center screw in the FICU.

Hahn RaceCraft continues to refine fuel system design as it applies to turbocharging, and the FICU is no exception. We will soon introduce more FICU models and options for FICU equipped vehicles. Please contact us if you have any questions or needs, and we will update you on the latest developments!

===========================
That's our official line, as sent out to the public; what follows now are some comments and insights I'd like to add:

There are many points to consider in reference to this comparison of other product to the regulator we use. Some of these points make a truly direct comparison difficult to achieve. Therefore, I ask that those who would take exception with any of these points below please consider the whole picture before engaging me in detailed debate about any one aspect.

1. The Vortech SFMU component is designed to be the ultimate of all rising rate regulators, and I commend it for that. It is also the most expensive! Yet, many aspects of our cars are also not the ultimate of what's available: many choices are based upon what we can afford. If we could all afford the best of everything, we would not be driving 2GNT's! Certainly, HRC could use this product, and the price of the system would rise accordingly: I do not think that this complex and expensive of a product is required to perform the task at hand.

2. The Vortech unit may respond to vacuum differently than our unit. I cannot say for sure, but I can assure you of this: if it uses the same rate of gain for vacuum that it does for boost (like ours), then it would have to also vary fuel pressure based upon changes in manifold vacuum. If it is hooked up the same way, and never, ever changes at idle as stated here, then it is most certainly not referencing manifold vacuum in the same fashion as ours.

3. We have intentionally referenced the fuel pressure to change at a large rate with vacuum. The intent is to cure an otherwise lean condition that will occur at low vacuum / almost boost conditions. In testing, when we set up the regulator to run a fixed pressure until boost is achieved, a lean condition was noted in this region. Sure, idle pressure was rock solid, but the lean part throttle aspect was unacceptable. The thing to keep in mind: your engine is actually being 'supercharged' (more air than without a turbo) well before actual gauge 'boost' occurs. She needs more fuel to accomodate this additional air, and our approach provides it.

4. Comparisons to 1:1 regs (like Jason notes with the Aeromotive) are not germaine to this conversation: of course they will be more steady, with only a fraction of the rate of change vs. vacuum that our FICU is intended to achieve.

5. Interestingly, the only time we hear about this fluctuation is on cars equipped to allow the driver to view fuel pressure all the time. Systems that are installed with the gauge used temporarily for setup and then removed never result in reports of fluctuations. Well, no kidding, right? But what this means to us is that those systems where the pressure is not being scrutinized are also not exhibiting driveability problems, and that therefore, there are no variations excessive enough to cause a problem. Only when the pressure is being looked at through the entire varying range seen during daily operation do we hear of a 'problem', and even then, the cars still run quite well, it's just gauge activity that is questioned.

6. The total number of actual inquiries on this aspect is but a fraction of the total kits sold. This is not to minimize the concerns of those who discuss this issue here, but to demonstrate that, contrary to the idea one might get from viewing posts here, the question is not at all widespread. No offense, folks, but Internet boards tend to whip up more of a lather over these types of issues, as folks feed off each other's opinions and 'expert' advice. One must also look at things from the Big Perspective to gain a truly accurate sample.

7. The closed-loop fuel system on these cars is marvelous at correcting for slight pressure variations. I recommend that one base whether or not they have a pressure variation problem on how the car runs, as opposed to what the gauge does. As far as what the gauge does, keep in mind the natural variations that will occur as a result of the points outlined above. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

========================================

Fuel Mappers

Jason, love ya, but you have left out one very important telephone conversation you and I had on this subject. I had hoped you would mention it by now, but as it does not support your 'position', you may have unintentionally left it out:

Any time one adds as much as a voltmeter to the MAP sensor circuit, the total circuit impedance is changed, and the interaction of the devices (MAP sensor, Fuel Mapper, ECU) can be affected. The addition of a Super AFC is a huge change, partially because its designed function is to change MAP voltage. Simply adding it to the circuit changes the impedance, even with all 'zeros' in the tables. Thus, the voltage seen on its readout will be different. Like those who view fuel pressure all the time, the only instances we have seen so far of a 'voltage issue' on the MAP circuit are from those with AFC's.

Now, before you folks with Scanners or Voltmeters cry foul, allow me to lay this on you: many factors beyond our control can also affect the ultimate MAP sensor voltage. These include sensor and harness issues, poor connections, corroded terminals, etc. What we do with every single Mapper is to bench calibrate them using a 5 volt reference, a new (known good) MAP sensor, and pressurized air. Every one is tested and set to within .05 volt, or 1%. We can't do better than that!

So, you might say, if there are possible variations on the car itself, why not allow the installer to calibrate it himself once installed? We've decided against it as too dangerous for the mainstream, as a misadjustment can be a BIG problem, and correctly hooking up a DVOM and then watching it during full boost operation...well, you can see what I mean. It's better this way.

FWIW, the MAP voltage range from about 3.9 to 4.5 volts is all interpreted by the ECU as full load: there is little difference in pulse width, and thus the fuel delivered to the engine is almost identical throughout that range.

Now, are there enough variations on cars themselves to warrant a different approach? No, based upon our testing and customer feedback. I had personally asked Jason to revisit his opinions after calling his attention to some of the above mentioned aspects, but I have not heard back from him. That's cool, I know that we are all very busy. But let's all talk on the same page: HRC is very dependent upon good backput from inquisitive, intelligent (but still amateur, after all) folks like Jason. Without it, we cannot identify and alleviate issues that occur in the field. All I ask is, don't be two-faced: if it's important enough to discuss in detail here, sharing info with us is equally important, especially if not sharing it with us can potentially lead to our products being cast in an unfavorable light, or prevent us from making corrections to benefit all.

==========================

Manifold Bolts

Yes, they are a pain! I'm sorry about that, but invest in a quality ball-end 6mm driver for best results. The shape of our manifold has dictated that we use these pesky Allen bolts. We feel it is a worthy compromise to support a manifold that is very durable and the most powerful available (9.80's @ 151 MPH, who else can say THAT?).

==============================

As a 'closer', I'd like to add that the best place for straight talk about our systems is our Tech Support Department. No one knows these cars or turbosystems better than us, and we are always willing to help. Call 630-801-9065 any weekday afternoon and speak directly to "Smilin" Len Ayala. The driver and co-owner of the world's Baddest 2.0 420A is always there for you. You can also email Tech: tech@turbosystem.com.


Thanks for your time, sorry for the long post,
Bill Hahn Jr.

Bill Hahn Jr.
98 RS Turbo: 10.87 @ 136 MPH
HRC Stage V with N20
Nation's Fastest Street FWD 2G DSM
www.turbosystem.com

Thanks Bill for taking the time to submit such a thorough response.

I would like to respond to some of those points if I could.

>1. The Vortech SFMU component is designed to be the
>ultimate of all rising rate regulators, and I commend it for
>that. It is also the most expensive! Yet, many aspects of
>our cars are also not the ultimate of what's available: many
>choices are based upon what we can afford. If we could all
>afford the best of everything, we would not be driving
>2GNT's! Certainly, HRC could use this product, and the
>price of the system would rise accordingly: I do not think
>that this complex and expensive of a product is required to
>perform the task at hand.

Agreed on that point. I very much like the straighforwardness you have in your answer to this point. Certainly keeping costs down to an affordable level for buyers is a worthy reason that others may not understand.

>
>2. The Vortech unit may respond to vacuum differently than
>our unit. I cannot say for sure, but I can assure you of
>this: if it uses the same rate of gain for vacuum that it
>does for boost (like ours), then it would have to also vary
>fuel pressure based upon changes in manifold vacuum. If it
>is hooked up the same way, and never, ever changes at idle
>as stated here, then it is most certainly not referencing
>manifold vacuum in the same fashion as ours.

The Vortech SFMU is hooked up EXACTLY the same way except it requires no exit vacuum line with a check valve. Otherwise, it uses AN fittings versus NPT fittings.


>5. Interestingly, the only time we hear about this
>fluctuation is on cars equipped to allow the driver to view
>fuel pressure all the time. Systems that are installed with
>the gauge used temporarily for setup and then removed never
>result in reports of fluctuations. Well, no kidding, right?
> But what this means to us is that those systems where the
>pressure is not being scrutinized are also not exhibiting
>driveability problems, and that therefore, there are no
>variations excessive enough to cause a problem. Only when
>the pressure is being looked at through the entire varying
>range seen during daily operation do we hear of a 'problem',
>and even then, the cars still run quite well, it's just
>gauge activity that is questioned.

I think having a fuel pressure gauge is extremely important and necessary. I think, you yourself in a discussion at DSMtalk.com said the same thing. Since fuel pressure is the main basis for fueling these turbosystems, monitoring and scrutinizng the fuel pressure seems not only important, but necessary and prudent.

>
>6. The total number of actual inquiries on this aspect is
>but a fraction of the total kits sold. This is not to
>minimize the concerns of those who discuss this issue here,
>but to demonstrate that, contrary to the idea one might get
>from viewing posts here, the question is not at all
>widespread. No offense, folks, but Internet boards tend to
>whip up more of a lather over these types of issues, as
>folks feed off each other's opinions and 'expert' advice.
>One must also look at things from the Big Perspective to
>gain a truly accurate sample.

The rate of unhappy Cartech FPR's seems a bit higher here. But I'm sure the enthusiasts here demand more.

>
>7. The closed-loop fuel system on these cars is marvelous
>at correcting for slight pressure variations. I recommend
>that one base whether or not they have a pressure variation
>problem on how the car runs, as opposed to what the gauge
>does. As far as what the gauge does, keep in mind the
>natural variations that will occur as a result of the points
>outlined above. If it ain't broke, don't fix it!

But if it can be improved upon, why not?





>
>========================================
>
>Fuel Mappers
>
>Jason, love ya, but you have left out one very important
>telephone conversation you and I had on this subject. I had
>hoped you would mention it by now, but as it does not
>support your 'position', you may have unintentionally left
>it out:
>
>Any time one adds as much as a voltmeter to the MAP sensor
>circuit, the total circuit impedance is changed, and the
>interaction of the devices (MAP sensor, Fuel Mapper, ECU)
>can be affected. The addition of a Super AFC is a huge
>change, partially because its designed function is to change
>MAP voltage. Simply adding it to the circuit changes the
>impedance, even with all 'zeros' in the tables. Thus, the
>voltage seen on its readout will be different. Like those
>who view fuel pressure all the time, the only instances we
>have seen so far of a 'voltage issue' on the MAP circuit are
>from those with AFC's.
>
>Now, before you folks with Scanners or Voltmeters cry foul,
>allow me to lay this on you: many factors beyond our
>control can also affect the ultimate MAP sensor voltage.
>These include sensor and harness issues, poor connections,
>corroded terminals, etc. What we do with every single
>Mapper is to bench calibrate them using a 5 volt reference,
>a new (known good) MAP sensor, and pressurized air. Every
>one is tested and set to within .05 volt, or 1%. We can't
>do better than that!
>
>So, you might say, if there are possible variations on the
>car itself, why not allow the installer to calibrate it
>himself once installed? We've decided against it as too
>dangerous for the mainstream, as a misadjustment can be a
>BIG problem, and correctly hooking up a DVOM and then
>watching it during full boost operation...well, you can see
>what I mean. It's better this way.
>
>FWIW, the MAP voltage range from about 3.9 to 4.5 volts is
>all interpreted by the ECU as full load: there is little
>difference in pulse width, and thus the fuel delivered to
>the engine is almost identical throughout that range.
>
>Now, are there enough variations on cars themselves to
>warrant a different approach? No, based upon our testing
>and customer feedback. I had personally asked Jason to
>revisit his opinions after calling his attention to some of
>the above mentioned aspects, but I have not heard back from
>him. That's cool, I know that we are all very busy. But
>let's all talk on the same page: HRC is very dependent upon
>good backput from inquisitive, intelligent (but still
>amateur, after all) folks like Jason. Without it, we cannot
>identify and alleviate issues that occur in the field. All
>I ask is, don't be two-faced: if it's important enough to
>discuss in detail here, sharing info with us is equally
>important, especially if not sharing it with us can
>potentially lead to our products being cast in an
>unfavorable light, or prevent us from making corrections to
>benefit all.
>




First, you are right about asking me to do such a test. However, and again as you correctly noted, I just never had the opportunity to run such a test. And since that time, I have switched my fuel system over to an 8 injector setup (which I couldnt be more pleased with). I apologize for not geting back to you with that.

However, since that time, our board has been advocating the use of a Synapse Engineering product, called the Missing Link. It's a glorified check valve with a perfect fit, and a seemless fit. It has eleiminated all voltage variations, and questioable calls as to why one's car may have mysteriously taken on a lean state.

And that's the most important issue to note with your fuel mapper. Even if it may work most of the time, and while you may have gone to a great amount of work in calibrating it to the 3 decimal place, it still has a lot of troubles. If you think this board has had qualms with the FPR, the fuel mapper's issues have gone way beyond that. As a matter of fact, every time someone has had an issue with mysterious leanness and the fuel pressures are adequate, all of us knee jerk that the fuel mapper has gone awry.

I think the FPR has a tolerable amount of problems with it, and the very amateur turbogoer can use it. However, the fuel mapper with its mysterious bouts of over clamping is intolerable. IMO, if that item goes really bad just once, as it had with me one time, it could cause a terrible leanness and your car could blow. (I hope you might remember when I had called you about 3 or 4 times(on different occasions) in regard to my mysterious leanness issues that turned out to be the fuel mapper. Even you didn't suspect the Fuel Mapper from over clamping. I didn't have an SAFC at the time either.)


>==========================
>
>Manifold Bolts
>
>Yes, they are a pain! I'm sorry about that, but invest in a
>quality ball-end 6mm driver for best results. The shape of
>our manifold has dictated that we use these pesky Allen
>bolts. We feel it is a worthy compromise to support a
>manifold that is very durable and the most powerful
>available (9.80's @ 151 MPH, who else can say THAT?).
>


Heh, results may vary. About every other manifold botl or stud I have used as a replacement for those allen bolts have been upgrades. In particular, I like the 4g63 studs and nuts. These allen manny bolts strip easily and the heads also have a tendency to break off. These are avoidable inferior quality parts in my opinion.


Thanks again for engaging in this discussion with us "amateurs!"

_____________________________________
Jason ESi-T

04' BMW 325Ci
91' Nissan 240SX
98' Eagle Talon ESi (sold)

"FWIW, the MAP voltage range from about 3.9 to 4.5 volts is all interpreted by the ECU as full load: there is little difference in pulse width, and thus the fuel delivered to the engine is almost identical throughout that range"

There IS a BIG difference with going from 3.9 to 4.5 volts, I have perfect proof of it. I had the mapper on and tested my map voltage with a 300 dollar volt meter, and got 4.01 volts. I was having lean problems under boost at 7 psi. I had 120+ psi of fuel pressure at the rail!!!!! Still lean!!! I disconnected the mapper, and volts went up to 4.5 on the meter. NOW the car has PLENTY of fuel. Why on earth would a map sensor think that 3.9 volts is WOT, if it is supposed to go to 4.5?? Why even have 4.5 volts then? The great Missing Link solved all my lean problems, and i lowerd the fuel pressure to what it was supposed to be for 8 psi.

The vortech SFMU DOES change fuel pressure with vacum differences. It does it very well, and steady, not all bouncy and fluctuating. More vac on the boost gauge, less fuel pressure on the fuel gauge. It rises JUST like the Cartach FPR, but it doesn't get all goofy. I would set my Cartach, to 50 psi. Shut the car off, then restart it, then its like at 65 psi?? Car is still fully warmed up, and idle speed dropped to normal, right where it was when the car was shut off.

If spending some more money to get quality parts that come with a kit, meant less headaches, less frustration, and less bull shit, I would pay it right away, hands down. The fuel system is the most important part of the turbo!! Why is it that you see so many blown engines with the Hahn kit, and NOT the Starr kit?? I think its evident here. When it comes to an engine, quality parts and proper fueling will keep it alive for a long time.

And as far as mani bolts, we just used a bench grinder and ground off the outer lips of the stock bolts and nuts. Works GREAT, never comes loose.

13.5 @108 MPH-2.2 60ft(stupid FWD!)
S16G @ 18 PSI/FMIC/Running on MegaSquirt II (Now with sequential
fuel injection)
My webpage: http://eclipsed4evr.home.comcast.net
-1998 Mitsubishi Eclipse RS-T- "Toy"
-1992 Plymouth Laser Turbo AWD(SOLD)
-2000 Honda CR-V(daily)

I blew my motor with a STAR kit.

Potentially, because there are a lot more HRC kits in the wild than STAR. Beleive me, the STAR kit is far from an ideal setup. Sometimes it requires modification just to install.. But at least we get a nice FMIC :-P

______________________________
If a sentence found online has 35% misspellings or greater and includes at least two racially charged expletives, chances are it is a YouTube comment.

'95 Eclipse TurboGS (garage deco)
'95 TSi AWD (restoring a survivor)
'97 Talon ESi-T (poor impulse control)
'99 Eclipse RS-T (daily beater)
'13 Evo X (mostly stock)
'17 Sienna (Middle Aged Dad Mobile)



Factory Service Manuals: http://nawdu.de/files/

Good responses, to be sure. I'd like to comment, but I'll wait for a few more to chime in...anyone else? Don't be shy...good, bad, or indifferent (just not abusive), it all matters in the Big Picture.

Jason: please forgive the Amateur status I conferred...I meant it literally, as in someone who does this for a Hobby, as opposed to disparagingly, as in someone who is inept. It was a clunky way to say it, so thanks for being thick skinned with me!

Bill

Bill Hahn Jr.
98 RS Turbo: 10.87 @ 136 MPH
HRC Stage V with N20
Nation's Fastest Street FWD 2G DSM
www.turbosystem.com

"Potentially, because there are a lot more HRC kits in the wild than STAR. Beleive me, the STAR kit is far from an ideal setup. Sometimes it requires modification just to install.. But at least we get a nice FMIC :-P"

Ahh yes, never really thought of that, very good point there.

Hopefully I didnt come across as to bash or demeanor the HRC kit. Bill, you have an excellent kit out there, but with only a few problems with the FPR, and the fuel mapper. If these were both worked out, then you would have a GOLDEN turbo kit, hands down. If it means paying up to 500 dollars more, for better quality parts, and more trouble free operation, not to mention thousands of dollars in damgaged engine costs, then I would think most will be willing to pay a little bit more, i know i sure wouldn't mind. And after thinking about it, the Starr kit that uses the Vortech FMU, Bill you are right on there, it has no static fuel pressure adjustment for vacum conditions, and relyies on the stock FPR. From little vac to 0 psi, it could def run lean. No doubt about that at all. This is why the SFMU is far superior in its performance. I still recomend your kit, to most who ask which one to get. But i will advise them as to the several problems with it, as a lot of people have had, including me. Your customer service is very good, polite people, and fast shipping, is what gives your business a very good rating as far as i am concerned..not like some others out there.. I feel that if people can save up a few grand for a turbo kit, then another 500 dollars or so isn't out of the question when it comes to reliability, and long lasting turbo fun without major engine problems.

13.5 @108 MPH-2.2 60ft(stupid FWD!)
S16G @ 18 PSI/FMIC/Running on MegaSquirt II (Now with sequential
fuel injection)
My webpage: http://eclipsed4evr.home.comcast.net
-1998 Mitsubishi Eclipse RS-T- "Toy"
-1992 Plymouth Laser Turbo AWD(SOLD)
-2000 Honda CR-V(daily)

>thinking about it, the Starr kit that uses the Vortech FMU,
>Bill you are right on there, it has no static fuel pressure
>adjustment for vacum conditions, and relyies on the stock
>FPR. From little vac to 0 psi, it could def run lean.

No.. the stock regulator (as do ALL stock regulators on EFI cars) does compensate for lessening vaccuum by increasing fuel pressure - it's not a set level.

Just wanted to clear that up.. Carry on, HRC guys.

______________________________
If a sentence found online has 35% misspellings or greater and includes at least two racially charged expletives, chances are it is a YouTube comment.

'95 Eclipse TurboGS (garage deco)
'95 TSi AWD (restoring a survivor)
'97 Talon ESi-T (poor impulse control)
'99 Eclipse RS-T (daily beater)
'13 Evo X (mostly stock)
'17 Sienna (Middle Aged Dad Mobile)



Factory Service Manuals: http://nawdu.de/files/

>
>Jason: please forgive the Amateur status I conferred...I
>meant it literally, as in someone who does this for a Hobby,
>as opposed to disparagingly, as in someone who is inept. It
>was a clunky way to say it, so thanks for being thick
>skinned with me!
>
>Bill

Absolutely no offense taken. I just had to have a little fun with it. (but please forgive many of the grammatical errors in my above response post. I didn't proofread it at all, since I was busy at the time, at work, spending your tax dollars! )

_____________________________________
Jason ESi-T

04' BMW 325Ci
91' Nissan 240SX
98' Eagle Talon ESi (sold)

Those are my tax dollars too! At least I'm paying for a full days work.

I want my job wasting your tax dollars too.

Una salus victus.
He will triumph, who knows when to fight, and when not to fight. - Sun Tzu

Michael J. Kulaga
e-mail: Michael_97RS@2gntDSM.zzn.com aol IM: MJKulga
http://highlander.dsmpower.com/

All motor in the making.

Injen CAI, 55mm TB, P&P Intake Manifold, Crower Stage 2 Cams, Hooker Header, GS-T Muffler, AFX UDP, S-AFC, 8.5mm Magnecor Wires, Crane Fireball HI-6DI2, FU/RU/RL STBs, TSW Blade 17x7.5, Bridgestone Potenza RE730, Front KVR Cross-Drilled Rotors & Carbon Fiber Pads

To Be Installed: P&P Milled Head, Rear Disc Brakes, Rear KVR Cross Drilled Rotors & Carbon Fiber Kevlar Pads, SS Brake Lines

Firefly:
Mal: You don't know me, son, so let me put this to you plainly: If I ever kill you, you'll be awake. You'll be facing me. And you'll be armed.

>Thanks Bill for taking the time to submit such a thorough
>response.

Agreed. I am still a happy customer, lately mostly because you take the time to come into "our" ring and talk with us. As opposed to demanding all complaints go thru some customer service line that has yet to help me much

>>5. Interestingly, the only time we hear about this
>>fluctuation is on cars equipped to allow the driver to view
>>fuel pressure all the time. Systems that are installed with
>>the gauge used temporarily for setup and then removed never
>>result in reports of fluctuations.

You may not hear about it, but this is simply not true. I've only seen 5 HRC turbosystems, and of those, 3 had fuel fluctuation that either affected drivability or caused detonation. (The other two had already replaced their FPR with a vortech.)

One kit never had a fuel gauge (tuned by datalogger), the other two had the gauge removed after setup per the manual's instructions. Yet after a few weeks, reconnecting the gauge would show a rise of 30-40psi! I also tried substituing different electronic and manual gauges on mine with the same results.

Even without a gauge you can HEAR the varying fuel pressures just by the sound the fuel pump makes. You can HEAR the rattle of detonation when your FP goes wrong. Those that don't use an FP gauge must not know what to look/listen for?? I didn't either until after I cracked 3 pistons.

>The rate of unhappy Cartech FPR's seems a bit higher here.
>But I'm sure the enthusiasts here demand more.

I think this is because people without the resources of this board are primarily as uneducated as I was when I started. When they blow their engine a few months/years down the road, they just write it off as the "price of having a turbo"... Which I think is the opposite of your motto of "maintaining excellent engine life and daily drivability".

I don't think we're all enthusiasts as much as people who just want to know WHY we're having to spend $3000 to rebuild, and what it's going to take to avoid that again in a few months. All the posts, comments from hondaboys and parents about "Doesn't that ruin your motor?" are caused by fear of this rebuild. That fear is definitely not HRC's fault, but HRC has positioned itself as a company that has designed a kit for the common person, that will last, and not to fear.

>>If it ain't broke, don't fix it!
>But if it can be improved upon, why not?

It's broke. Please fix it. It would have cost maybe $100-200 more when I first bought the kit to inclide a Vortech SFMU. Now, it's costing me $300 to "upgrade" to something that works like it's supposed to. Nobody wants to buy my Cartech FPR either.

>>Every one is tested and set to within .05 volt, or 1%. We can't
>>do better than that!

Then please consider including a Missing link or one of the other new FCDs on the market that CAN do better than that. I realize it's impossible to test each unit for moisture, crazy engine bay temps, shock, frost, age, etc... but you need to realize that the HRC FCD units are failing under these conditions.

>>Manifold Bolts
>>We feel it is a worthy compromise

Don't compromise. 4g63 studs, bolts, and washers are available from RRE for $15. I use and love them. I'm sure you can get them cheaper. That's also about what we would pay for a quality hex wrench.

My point:
- Incremental cost for better parts: under $500
- Kit pricing still competitive with others in the market ... even at $3750 (50% markup)
- Support call volume & returns decreased.
- Reputation will vastly improve, especially among us internet enthusiasts that talk too much.
- Any "enthusiast" will gladly pay extra for an "enthusiast's kit". (Stage IIe?) hehe look at how many Eclipse GS's sold, compared to RS's.

I *love* my turbosystem. I can't wait to have my car rebuilt. Anyone who has doubts? HRC turbosystems rock! They're totally worth $3000, every penny of it. Now if they change their mind on these components, and replace them with quality ones, it will be worth well over $4000, simply because it's cost some of us idiots and unlucky ones $6000 to make the kit work, even at 5psi.

thedawg pretty much said everthing I was thinking. I too have had issues with the cartech regulator. On multiple occasions, I would set the fuel pressure to 45-50 psi, then turn the car off and immediatly turn it back on and see 70-80 psi of fuel pressure. I checked my vacuum multiple times thinking that my car was under different vacuum conditions, but vacuum was right on 17. The problem was definately with the regulator.

I am one of those lucky individuals who has a 95 so I don't have to deal with MAP voltage issues. I am however good friends with XtremeRS who has already posted what he has to say about your FCD. I was working on his problem with his car leaning out at 8 psi. We used my datalogger to view exactly what was going on and he was definately leaning out (a/f voltage was .87 and the car would detonate). As he said, we set the fuel pressure as high as we could (approx 120 psi) and it didn't do a thing. About a week later he got the missing link and put it on and we pulled out the datalogger again. This time at 110 psi of fuel pressure and 8 lbs of boost, the a/f gauge was reading .94 in 3rd gear. The fuel trims also looked better in closed loop mode.

As far as the allen bolts, what I wound up doing is what Matt said already. I just ground the lip off the stock ones and have never had a problem since. Going with the 4g63 bolts sounds like a good alternative to me. I didnt know that they would work when I ground off the edges of the bolts, or I would have just bought those.

Its very nice to see a vendor ask for people's critical input on their product. This information can be extremely valuable to vendors if they take constructive criticism well, and it gives you a good chance to clear things up when we are wrong without creating a "scene". Your customer service is terrific as well, which is a rare thing to see in this business. ehrrrm... anyway, keep up the good work and the great service. I will continue to recommend your kit as I always have and take pride in the fact that I own one.

Matt
1995 Eclipse GS
2.0L, S16g Turbo, 8 Injectors, 26psi

1998 Eclipse GSX
2.3L Stroker, AEM EMS Converted to Speed Density, FP3065 Turbo, 35psi , and so on...

Mr. Bill Hahn Jr...
your turbosystem rocks dude
but there are a couple parts like stated by other hrc users who love your products..
need to work on or look into the follow area to fix:
fpr that comes with the kits, im not sure what to say but i had my fp gauge connected all the time (except for rain) for about 5 or so months just because another memeber (jamesman) fpr keep fluxin like a mad man all the time... this is the reason i had my gauge on all the time for 'just in case'... i would look into the s-fmu by vortex, i rather pay a bit more instead of all the trouble of geting a fpr that is 'better'.
my hrc mapper would range from 4.0v-4.4v 'on my car' so i decided to get a check valve 'missing link' and all is great now with 4.5-4.6v ..something else i would look into....
those dame bolt to hold the manifold down is one mean 'bi*ch' to work with PLEASE look into some 4g63 studs etc or so...
and this really does not related to the topic at hand, but i never get a chance to call you since im busy. could you get some sort of bottom end and top end packages like howellautomotive has at a fair price and i beat ALOT of members would buy them from you.. i would...
my hrc turbo at 9psi




Michael 99gs
HRC Stage 2
http://www.dreamwater.net/purplebeast

Michael
99gs hrc stage 5000 SOLD...
2004 Honda Accord V6 (240 hp)stock
what other car should i buy?? hmmm
Car info & pictures at http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/520269

Let me explain where I stand, and how everything affects myself. (it all ties in with qaulity products and service...not just jargon about myself..)

I'm 18, turning 19 in October, so financially this is much harder to obtain than others. I kind of got into the whole 'modding eclipse' thing about a year and a half ago, somewhat enticed by Jason's Talon and the feeling of his car boosting. I needed a turbo kit, bad. At first thought, 2,000 dollars seemed way over my head, and I quickly decided not to even think twice about spending that kind of money. Well, after wasting a few hundred bucks on rice (for my previous Eclipse..NOT this one). I later sold that Eclipse (automatic) and got myself a nice 5-Speed. At this point, I realized that I might as well work my ass off and save up the chunk of money necessary for an HRC kit. Well I did it, I ordered the kit, slipped Jason a C-note and we got to work. We finished the install in roughly 2 days, everything went pretty smoothly. The only thing that isn't so great is my pocket book. At this point in time, if my engine were to blow, I would be struck. There is no way I could afford a $3,000 rebuild, not even with a credit card...due to the fact that at this age, the highest limit I can receive is about a grand. This is where I'm at now.

My car is hitting 4psi, and I love it. The kit is incredible, and is running great. I'm especially happy with the turbo size and quick spool, the factor that lead me to choose it over other kits. YOur customer service is also incredible. The only flaw, within any part of this experience, is the fact that the thought of blowing my engine runs through my head at least 3 times a day. (Yes I know, many have told me that it's a risk you take when turbocharging, things can go wrong, even with the best quality parts, and prefect tuning, something can go wrong..regardless of that.)

I constantly check my fuel pressure each day at idle and WOT hoping that it will fall into specs ~55psi idle/~90psi WOT. Without getting technical, I'll just say it fluctuates. Sometimes quite a bit, even after warmed up. I will make proper adjustments yet still I can't hold that steady fuel pressure. LAtely, I can say that is has been holding up okay, but not enough that I trust driving my car before knowing that it's in spec. I will be upgrading to the Vortech SFMU, so I can trust my fuel pressure will perfect - and I need to know its perfect as fuel itself is a huge factor. I would have much rather invested an extra $200 bucks into the kit, than have to deal with this, and then switch later down the road and not be able to sell the billet. Toss a Vortech into the kit!

As far as the fuel cut defencer goes, as mentioned above several times and I know you know...it has a few issues. I sold it for 20 bucks, and would be getting a missing link...but luckily even when my MAP sensor reads 4.955 Volts like it does every day, it doesn't fuel cut; with no fuel cut defencer or missing link. -- but for most people whose MAP sensors work normally, a missing link to replace the fcd in the kit wouldn't hurt.

A couple hundred bucks onto the tab for the turbo kit is worth it for the confidence the customer can have in their fuel system. With my cartech fpr and the fcd I don't feel confident in the fuel system.

Everyday I pray my engine won't blow..toss in these crucial parts so others on my budget won't have to. I'd MUCH rather pay extra for the kit, than have to be forced with a 3,000 repair bill.

p.s. Dont get me wrong, the kit is AWESOME, and I recommend to every 420a owner that looks at my engine bay. Simply the best. But even the best, can be better.

______________________________

Ryan
IRyanHester@Hotmail.com

'03 Mazda 6s

Everyone!

Please forgive my absence. Between the holiday weekend, my laptop getting infected with a virus, a race for us in Tampa this weekend, blah, blah, blah...

We truly appreciate your willingness to provide feedback. Its all been very thought-provoking. I believe there is an excellent opportunity for us to incorporate some of these aspects into our system to improve it further.

My intention today was to let you know that I am now reviewing all of the above info. It's a lot to digest, so bear with me for a few days, as I will be out of town until early next week.

In the meantime, I would like to invite further comments, and offer up my email for anyone who would like a direct conversation with me: eng@turbosystem.com.

Question: would someone please email me contact info for the company that produces the Missing Link? They did contact us some time back, but I fear the info found its way to the'circular file'.

Manifold fastener wise, I think we will go with a version of the stock fastener that uses a stud and a small, 10mm hex flange nut. I have reviewed the manifold construction, and I see a chance for a slight revision that will allow this stud/nut to clear the manifold. Previously, we used the Allen bolts asa default due to the tight clearance, but I think we can get these compact flange nuts to work with a slight revision. Existing kits may well be able to retrofit to this stud / nut as well. Some of our existing manifolds will clear them, and those that don't usually only require a small amount of material to be removed off the OD of the flange on the nut (I believe another poster mentioned this). As an alternative, a small amount of the weld on the manifold can be removed with a die grinder to create the required clearance.

Can any of you 2GNT junkies tell me how many of these studs / nuts your car came with? They held on the stock manifold. Mention your model year too.

My sincere thanks for your sincere input.

I will return after the race (Hondas beware, we are coming on strong!),
Bill Hahn Jr.

Bill Hahn Jr.
98 RS Turbo: 10.87 @ 136 MPH
HRC Stage V with N20
Nation's Fastest Street FWD 2G DSM
www.turbosystem.com

My FCD had always worked or me. I went ahead and put the missing link on just to be on the safe side.

The problems (minor ones) I see in the HRC kit:

The size of the down pipe.

That lower down pipe flange bolt.

Inconsistencies w/ the fcd. Again mine worked fine but other people on this board have had problems.

The FPR has got to go! Have you ever taken that thing apart? Once you do you see all the real quality parts they used to make it. (Being sarcastic)

The bolts for the manifold.

All in all minor problems that are easily fixed. I think what gets most people is that they buy a kit and soon realize what people on this board have been saying forever and have to spend more money to make it right.

When I was using the HRC supplied FPR I ran into the inconsistencies of it as well. You set it to your idle pressure and it would slowly climb back up to around 80-100psi at idle.

This problem is easily fixed w/ the standard Vortech fpr.


Oh and Bill, when are you going to have your harness ready for the gen 7 box DFI?

Thanks
Brian Williams

Hello again Bill,

I've had a recent response from the CEO at Synapse Engineering and sent him an email in regards to your request. Certainly incorporating their product into your kit would be an ideal marriage!

Peter Medina
CEO, Synapse Engineering Inc.
http://www.synapseengineering.com/html/ml003.html
info@synapseengineering.com (I contacted him at this email)

I would certainly like to reference this write-up here from Synapse Engineering in regards to why the Missing Link is superior to voltage clamping: http://www.synapseengineering.com/html/advanced_tech.html

_____________________________________
Jason ESi-T

04' BMW 325Ci
91' Nissan 240SX
98' Eagle Talon ESi (sold)

Brian,

You mention the dp being a problem in sizing. I want to note that the neck must be of the diameter it is in order to fit. It flares out to 2.5" from 2". I have a custom 2.5" that would fit no other way. Also, the 2.5" is ideal for a car with a stock cat and flex section anyway. If you do want to go larger, HRC actually DOES offer a 3" down pipe you can incorporate if you just ask them about it. Armond is currently running the HRC 3" dp and HRC 3" cat on his Avenger. Call them up and ask about it.

05 Mazda RX-8
06 Lotus Elise

Wow, Bill, Jason, and everyone else that has posted on this thread. This has been an amazing and very informative discussion.

I haven't been on the boards in a while, but I do remember talk about how the FPR is problematic. Even with fellow 420a acquantences that I have talked to in person, the vortech FMU was highly suggested.

Bill, as a person who has not yet gone turbo, I have always sided with the HRC kit. When I first started reading this thread though, I honestly started having doubts. Though in the end, I would have still bought your kit, but just replaced the parts in question. Better safe then sorry, especially for us tight budget, speed obsessed college students. I, and I think many other enthusiasts, would absolutely NOT mind paying an extra $500 for hassle free parts. Like others have said, the extra money now is alot better then worrying about a $3000 dollar rebuild later.

As I finished up the thread, I was very happy to read that you have taken into consideration the comments everyone had. If you do make the changes in your HRC kit, I will definately spend the extra money to purchase your kit and redouble my efforts to tell every 420a eclipse owner about your great turbo, great customer support, and what will be a great fuel system as well!

Thank you very much Bill for participating in our forum discussions and it is always an honor to see you post.

16.1 @ 87.11
http://www.virtuallyinfamous.com

ARD 57mm tb and p&p manifold, Neuspeed STB, Pro-kits, Illuminas, Injen CAI with K&N, 2.5" pacesetter catback,
AF/X UDP, Rear STB, Powerslot rotors, RRE SS Brakelines.

Chris, when i called hrc and talked to Brad a while ago, i asked about a 2.5 or 3 in dp for our cars, and he said, we only offer it for the 4g63 motor?.. i was like hmm someone on the 2gnt.com board has a 3in one ( forgot who) ... does anyone got a part # of this and price?
thanks

Michael 99gs
HRC Stage 2
Stage 3 process begins anyone got a 420a block thats not spun etc?
http://www.dreamwater.net/purplebeast

Michael
99gs hrc stage 5000 SOLD...
2004 Honda Accord V6 (240 hp)stock
what other car should i buy?? hmmm
Car info & pictures at http://www.cardomain.com/memberpage/520269

I think you should try calling again. I think the person who gave you grief is the same one who always gave me grief.

Give them another call and see what happens. Armond does have the 3" HRC dp and the 3" HRC cat.

05 Mazda RX-8
06 Lotus Elise

You can have a mandrel bent 3'' downpipe with 3'' flex section made up by any competent welder for about 150-175 bucks...

I also have the 3" dp. It's 2 pieces. The 1st piece goes from 2" to 3" and is about 6" long or so. The second piece is 3" all the way to the cat.

Greg

'19 Genesis G70 3.3t AWD
'88 Chrysler Conquest TSI